D&D 5E Casting in melee

[Nikosandros]

If I'm reading the rules correctly, there are no penalties for casting a spell while in melee with an opponent (besides getting disadvantage if the spell requires a ranged attack).

What do you think of this? This would be the first edition in which a caster can use with impunity hold person or charm person while in melee.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

For some reason opportunity attacks only seem to go off when provoked by movement, nothing else. That's a little backwards. You'll end up with PCs (and maybe even NPCs) so afraid of opportunity attacks they won't move once they've engaged in combat, and that means you can fire a crossbow bolt into someone's face without risking an opportunity attack without needing to spend a feat or some other opportunity cost.

 

[mach1.9pants]

For basic I think it is fine, in fact for basic I wish they had dropped opportunity attacks totally. The simplest rule is if you move into someone's reach your movement ends. I would personally go for no casting in melee (unless it makes sense - burning hands for example) and no firing of bows into melee and no movement through 'threatened area' - very simple and can be added to easily in the PHB/DMG.

But it is basic so spell sin melee fine to me.

 

[Nikosandros]

At least, if you fire a crossbow, you get disadvantage. If you cast hold person, you don't have any penalty.

 

[mach1.9pants]

I agree it is odd, for my sensibilities, but not too bad for basic.

Also makes the first PC I wanted to make on reading the rules (a Mountain Dwarf Wizard with medium armour and warhammer) rather viable haha

 

[MerricB]

What do you think of this? This would be the first edition in which a caster can use with impunity hold person or charm person while in melee.

This doesn't match what actually occurred in play. In both 3E and 4E, casters could often cast spells in melee and have no problems with it at all. 3E had Concentration and the five-foot step, 4E had various implements and abilities that allowed ranged or area spells to be cast without fear of disruption.

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

You'll end up with PCs (and maybe even NPCs) so afraid of opportunity attacks they won't move once they've engaged in combat, and that means you can fire a crossbow bolt into someone's face without risking an opportunity attack without needing to spend a feat or some other opportunity cost.

Note that you can move freely around someone (or possibly even through larger/smaller creatures), and never provoke an opportunity attack; they are only triggered when you *leave* someone's reach. In a lot of ways, it's more freedom than previous editions.

And firing a crossbow into someone's face is still tricky due to disadvantage.

 

[evileeyore]

If I'm reading the rules correctly, there are no penalties for casting a spell while in melee with an opponent (besides getting disadvantage if the spell requires a ranged attack).

What do you think of this? This would be the first edition in which a caster can use with impunity hold person or charm person while in melee.

Not seeing any flaws here. Wizard in melee is the greatest threat the Wizard should be facing anyway.

 

[Stalker0]

Note that you can move freely around someone (or possibly even through larger/smaller creatures), and never provoke an opportunity attack; they are only triggered when you *leave* someone's reach. In a lot of ways, it's more freedom than previous editions.

Freerer in pretty much every way that I can tell. Ranged Attacks, Casting, Movement, and Special Attacks all eased up on the OA hits.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I could have sworn I read somewhere in there that not only do you have disadvantage on any attack roll, but if there's a save instead of an attack, the target gets advantage on the save.

I can't cite it, though. I might be fusing more than one thing together. Pretty sure it's there somewhere though.